Steve Collins criminal case, civil suit move forward

Though attorneys are still wrangling over the release of county records, a preliminary hearing on conflict of interest and other charges against former county water board member Steve Collins will go ahead early next month.

Superior Court Judge Pamela Butler said last week the hearing would continue as scheduled on Oct. 9 and 11. A disagreement between defense and county attorneys as to whether hundreds of county documents are subject to disclosure should not delay the hearing, the judge said.

Collins' attorney Mike Lawrence filed a motion last week to compel the county to release more records, arguing that county attorneys were improperly asserting attorney-client privilege. County Counsel Charles McKee said the judge was satisfied with what has been disclosed so far.

Lawrence did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Collins is facing more than 40 charges, including nearly three dozen felonies. They include an alleged conflict of interest for being paid by a private firm — RMC Water and Environment — for work he did on the failed regional desalination project while he was a public official.

Collins argues that county officials and others knew about the arrangement with RMC, assured him there was no conflict and disavowed any knowledge of his dual role only after it was reported in the media.

In a civil suit against the county, Collins on Tuesday filed a 118-page document on evidence that he contends "clearly establish a probability of success" in the suit. Collins alleges county officials, including supervisors, defrauded and defamed him by claiming not to know about his work for RMC and conspired to make him a scapegoat. He is seeking $25 million in damages for "fraud and conspiracy" with malice.

In August, Judge Lydia Villarreal told Collins to produce evidence to support his claims after county attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the suit.

County attorneys argued that Collins' suit was based on public statements by county officials that, if made at all, should be protected speech because of the importance of public dialogue on the desalination issue.

In his filing, Collins argues county officials aren't allowed to knowingly lie in public about what they know. He alleges that county officials intentionally targeted him with an "independent investigation" while diverting attention from their own roles.

Collins' filing promises to deliver a written opinion by a county-hired law firm that his work for RMC did not represent a conflict of interest and taped interviews with several supervisors.

But neither is included in the documented evidence in Collins' filing, which includes email logs that purport to show county officials and others discussing the potential conflict of interest well before they indicated they knew about it.

McKee said he hadn't yet scrutinized the filing, but said a brief review suggested it was not responsive to the judge's order to provide evidence rather than a narrative. County attorneys have until Sept. 14 to respond.

Collins, who filed the suit without legal representation, and county attorneys are to be back in court Sept. 21 for a hearing on the motion to dismiss.

Collins, county supervisors and other public officials are under investigation by the state Fair Political Practices Commission.